|
|
Post by surfsup on Mar 4, 2005 17:35:25 GMT -5
Calling all legal genius', what does anyone think of the woman in Fla. who's husband wants to disconnect her feeding tube and has some guy named "greer" in the usual black robe garb, that is "presiding" over this legal monkey bizzness, wanting to end her life to set legal "presidence" for future state ordered deaths  |
|
|
|
Post by denizen on Mar 4, 2005 18:20:06 GMT -5
If you ignore the issue of trying to determine what is best for the long comotose woman; it seems to me the next most important question is who is to pay to maintain her vegetative state? If those wishing to see her maintained; expect it to be done with stolen funds (taxes), I would think that is immoral IMHO. If those same persons wish to do it with their own funds, this is not an issue.
I do think the first issue is prime. If it is known that she would not have wished to continue in such a state (which would definitely be my own position) than ignoring that fact is fraught.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neo on Mar 4, 2005 22:28:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by surfsup on Mar 4, 2005 23:38:52 GMT -5
There Is a trust that was set up for her, so it is not costing john q. public except for the "judge" that wants to disconnect her so he can set a "legal precedent" is collecting his paychecks from the taxpayer
|
|
|
|
Post by surfsup on Mar 4, 2005 23:49:50 GMT -5
Also she was raised in a catholic family. Which takes a dim view of ending ones life prematurely.
Can't speak for her, but I don't think hubby or "judgey" can or should make that determination, regardless of catholic beliefs or not.
who made them "god"?
|
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Mar 5, 2005 9:37:40 GMT -5
Who made anyone god to keep her alive when her body won't live by itself? She's being forced to live.
|
|
|
|
Post by learnin2 on Mar 5, 2005 9:40:56 GMT -5
Why should a judge be able to pronounce the death penalty on a handicapped person, who has commited no crime? Why doesn't the judge just dissolve the marrige, and remand custody back to the parents? The husband just wants her dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by learnin2 on Mar 5, 2005 9:44:39 GMT -5
Who made anyone god to keep her alive when her body won't live by itself? She's being forced to live. The same could be said for any infant child, or quadrapoligic. To feed, or not to feed! That's the question? |
|
|
|
Post by surfsup on Mar 5, 2005 10:17:34 GMT -5
Dear Non, As a pet owner I would do all that i could both finances and emotionaly to help my "bud" don't you think that Terri's circumstance is MUCH more important, She may come out of this, she has concisteintly been denied ANY therepy or treatment by "hubbys" orders. Nurses that have cared for her have stated that she is responsive and would be doing much better if she had access to therepy.
|
|
|
|
Post by gonopodium on Mar 5, 2005 13:31:07 GMT -5
What factual evidence can you offer us to support your statement? Gonopodium Dear Non, As a pet owner I would do all that i could both finances and emotionaly to help my "bud" don't you think that Terri's circumstance is MUCH more important, She may come out of this, she has concisteintly been denied ANY therepy or treatment by "hubbys" orders. Nurses that have cared for her have stated that she is responsive and would be doing much better if she had access to therepy. |
|
|
|
Post by surfsup on Mar 5, 2005 17:27:38 GMT -5
Read about her ordeal at Jeff Rense.com as well as
Info wars.com Those sites will give you even more links that will answer your questions. cause factualy If hubby and the "judge" get their way she will not survive
|
|
Harry
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by Harry on Mar 5, 2005 20:09:08 GMT -5
LEARNIN2:
Why doesn't the judge just dissolve the marrige, and remand custody back to the parents? The husband just wants her dead.
HARRY:
My understanding is husband's already remarried. The photographs of her parents holding her, etc., don't really indicate to me she's responsive. We need to beware of relying on information from sources that have their own agendas, here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neo on Mar 5, 2005 20:53:56 GMT -5
Why don't we all visit the hospital together and form our own opinion? If we can't do that, then keep the hell out of it and insist the "state" does as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by learnin2 on Mar 6, 2005 0:33:21 GMT -5
HARRY: My understanding is husband's already remarried. The photographs of her parents holding her, etc., don't really indicate to me she's responsive. We need to beware of relying on information from sources that have their own agendas, here. No, he isn't remarried. That would be bigomy. He is still the legal husband of Terri. He currently has 2 kids from his girlfriend. |
|
|
|
Post by surfsup on Mar 6, 2005 17:08:20 GMT -5
Neo, I agree that the state should stay out of it.
But you have a guy in a black nightgown wanting to make a name for himself, by setting legal presedence. I guess the ego gratification in so doing far outweighs this womans life. So this is were we come in, that by raising public awareness she may be protected from this "bar" member and the hubby who wants the trust fund dough.
|
|
